Literature DB >> 23218250

Differential item functioning of the HADS and PHQ-9: an investigation of age, gender and educational background in a clinical UK primary care sample.

Isobel M Cameron1, John R Crawford, Kenneth Lawton, Ian C Reid.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) are commonly used measures in clinical practice and research. It is important that such scales measure the trait they purport to measure and that the impact of other measurement artefacts is minimal. Differential item functioning of these scales by gender, educational background and age is currently assessed.
METHODS: Severity of depression and anxiety symptoms were measured in primary care patients referred to mental health workers using the PHQ-9 and HADS. Each scale was assessed for Differential Item Functioning (DIF) and Differential Test Function (DTF) by gender, educational background and age. Minimum n per analysis=895. DIF was assessed with Mantel's χ(2), Liu-Agresti cumulative common odds ratio (LA LOR) and the standardised LA LOR (LA LOR-Z). DTF was assessed in relation to ν(2).
RESULTS: PHQ-9, HADS Depression Sub-scale (HADS-D) and HADS Anxiety Subscale (HADS-A) lacked bias in terms of gender and educational background (ν(2)<0.07). However, both PHQ-9 and HADS-D exhibited bias with regard to age: PHQ-9 ν(2)=0.103 (medium effect); HADS-D ν(2)=0.214 (large effect). PHQ-9 items exhibiting DIF by age covered: anhedonia, energy and low mood. HADS-D items exhibiting DIF by age covered psychomotor retardation and interest in appearance. LIMITATIONS: No assessment of other potential DIF contributors was made.
CONCLUSIONS: PHQ-9, HADS-D and HADS-A generally do not exhibit bias for gender and educational background. However bias was observed in PHQ-9 and HADS-D for age. Caution should be exercised interpreting scores both in clinical practice and research.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23218250     DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2012.11.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Affect Disord        ISSN: 0165-0327            Impact factor:   4.839


  10 in total

1.  Measurement invariance of the patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) depression screener in U.S. adults across sex, race/ethnicity, and education level: NHANES 2005-2016.

Authors:  Jay S Patel; Youngha Oh; Kevin L Rand; Wei Wu; Melissa A Cyders; Kurt Kroenke; Jesse C Stewart
Journal:  Depress Anxiety       Date:  2019-07-29       Impact factor: 6.505

2.  A comparison of three methods of assessing differential item functioning (DIF) in the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale: ordinal logistic regression, Rasch analysis and the Mantel chi-square procedure.

Authors:  Isobel M Cameron; Neil W Scott; Mats Adler; Ian C Reid
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-05-22       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Screening for depression in arthritis populations: an assessment of differential item functioning in three self-reported questionnaires.

Authors:  Jinxiang Hu; Michael M Ward
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-06-17       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Diagnostic accuracy and feasibility of depression screening in spinal cord injury: A systematic review.

Authors:  Rebecca Titman; Jason Liang; B Catharine Craven
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 1.985

5.  Cross-cultural validation of the German and Turkish versions of the PHQ-9: an IRT approach.

Authors:  Hanna Reich; Winfried Rief; Elmar Brähler; Ricarda Mewes
Journal:  BMC Psychol       Date:  2018-06-05

6.  Measurement Invariance and Psychometric Analysis of Oxford Happiness Inventory Scale across Gender and Marital Status.

Authors:  Amin Mousavi; Zahra Sharafi; Abdolreza Mahmoudi; Hadi Raeisi Shahraki
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-06-21       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  Psychometric properties of the Danish Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale in patients with cardiac disease: results from the DenHeart survey.

Authors:  Anne Vinggaard Christensen; Jane K Dixon; Knud Juel; Ola Ekholm; Trine Bernholdt Rasmussen; Britt Borregaard; Rikke Elmose Mols; Lars Thrysøe; Charlotte Brun Thorup; Selina Kikkenborg Berg
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2020-01-07       Impact factor: 3.186

8.  Construct Validity and Differential Item Functioning of the PHQ-9 Among Health Care Workers: Rasch Analysis Approach.

Authors:  Surin Jiraniramai; Tinakon Wongpakaran; Chaisiri Angkurawaranon; Wichuda Jiraporncharoen; Nahathai Wongpakaran
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 2.570

9.  Comparison of unweighted and item response theory-based weighted sum scoring for the Nine-Questions Depression-Rating Scale in the Northern Thai Dialect.

Authors:  Suttipong Kawilapat; Benchalak Maneeton; Narong Maneeton; Sukon Prasitwattanaseree; Thoranin Kongsuk; Suwanna Arunpongpaisal; Jintana Leejongpermpoon; Supattra Sukhawaha; Patrinee Traisathit
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2022-10-12       Impact factor: 4.612

10.  Validity of single item responses to short message service texts to monitor depression: an mHealth sub-study of the UK ACUDep trial.

Authors:  Ada Keding; Jan R Böhnke; Tim J Croudace; Stewart J Richmond; Hugh MacPherson
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 4.615

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.